Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Low error Kramers-Kronig estimations using symmetric extrapolation method Cover

Low error Kramers-Kronig estimations using symmetric extrapolation method

Journal of Electrical Bioimpedance
Volume 12 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)
By: G.A. Ruiz and  C.J. Felice  
Open Access
|Dec 2021

Figures & Tables

Fig.1

Three-electrode cell. WE: working electrode, Re1. reference electrode, CE: counter-electrode.
Three-electrode cell. WE: working electrode, Re1. reference electrode, CE: counter-electrode.

Fig.2

Frequency and amplitude of the interpolated points. ωp: ${{\omega }_{p}}:$central frequency of the dispersion.
Frequency and amplitude of the interpolated points. ωp: ${{\omega }_{p}}:$central frequency of the dispersion.

Fig.3

Resistance (Black) and reactance series equivalents (Steel Blue) of the EEI versus frequency for AISI 304 stainless steel electrode polished with sandpaper #180 in NaCl 0.9% solution. Overpotential applied = 10 mV.
Resistance (Black) and reactance series equivalents (Steel Blue) of the EEI versus frequency for AISI 304 stainless steel electrode polished with sandpaper #180 in NaCl 0.9% solution. Overpotential applied = 10 mV.

Fig.4

Reactance series equivalent of the ZEEI versus frequency. Experimental data (◼) and applying the KK equation (4) to the experimental data (x).
Reactance series equivalent of the ZEEI versus frequency. Experimental data (◼) and applying the KK equation (4) to the experimental data (x).

Fig.5

Resistance series equivalent of the EEI impedance. Expanded dataset (ο) and Experimental data (∙).
Resistance series equivalent of the EEI impedance. Expanded dataset (ο) and Experimental data (∙).

Fig.6

Reactance series equivalents of the EEI versus frequency. Experimental data () and applying the KK equation (4) to the expanded dataset (x).
Reactance series equivalents of the EEI versus frequency. Experimental data () and applying the KK equation (4) to the expanded dataset (x).

Fig.7

Percentage change of Zp′′(ΔZp′′%)  versus ωmin. $Z_{p}^{\prime \prime }\left( \Delta Z_{p}^{\prime \prime }\text{%} \right)\,\,\text{versus}\,{{\omega }_{min}}.$Red point: case without extrapolation (figure 4). Blue point: ΔZp′′%=−1. $\Delta Z_{p}^{\prime \prime }{\text%}=-1.$
Percentage change of Zp′′(ΔZp′′%)  versus ωmin. $Z_{p}^{\prime \prime }\left( \Delta Z_{p}^{\prime \prime }\text{%} \right)\,\,\text{versus}\,{{\omega }_{min}}.$Red point: case without extrapolation (figure 4). Blue point: ΔZp′′%=−1. $\Delta Z_{p}^{\prime \prime }{\text%}=-1.$
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/joeb-2021-0017 | Journal eISSN: 1891-5469
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 147 - 152
Submitted on: Sep 1, 2021
|
Published on: Dec 27, 2021
Published by: University of Oslo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
Kramers-Kronig,
symmetric,
extrapolation
Related subjects:
Engineering,
Bioengineering and biomedical engineering,
Biomedical electronics,
Life sciences,
Biophysics,
Medicine,
Biomedical engineering,
Physics,
Spectroscopy and metrology

© 2021 G.A. Ruiz, C.J. Felice, published by University of Oslo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 12 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)Next article